[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
I wrote: > Jordan: xod, I mean > > On Sun, 15 Dec 2002, Jordan DeLong wrote: > > > > "...they cannot refer to things that cannot be pointed at." > > > > > > "In written text, on the other > > > hand, the meaning of the ti-series is inherently vague; is the > writer to be > > > taken as pointing to something, and if so, to what? In all cases, > > what counts > > > as ``near'' and ``far away'' is relative to the current situation." > > > > There is no way you can possibly misinterpret the above to mean that ti > > can refer to unpointable things in the way that ko'a or da can > > It seems strange to me that "ti" should mean something different in > writing than in speech. One can point in writing (e.g. with arrows), > while if "ti" can point back to something nearby in the text > in writing, I can't see why it shouldn't be able to do so in speech > > So your reading of CLL may be scripturally licensed, but is somewhat > unfortunate That should be "Jordan's reading". --And.